Recent Posts

If you believe all the stories about the Keystone XL Pipeline , you would think it is the standard battle between oil interests and environmentalists. It ignores the reality that there was substantial opposition in Nebraska, a Republican state because the pipeline would run through an aquifer and a spill would endanger drinking water and water needed for farming. The state’s Republican Governor said he would only support the permit if the pipeline was rerouted. Opposition in Nebraska was across party line from conservative farmers to liberal environmentalists. Transcanada the company building the pipeline was opposed to re-routing it. Just to be clear, the pipeline with all the media attention is the XL, there are other Keystone pipelines operating or proposed by Transcanada. The one they opened in 2010 that crosses North Dakota had 12 spills in its first year, an average of one per month, including one spill of 21,000 gallons. This is not to mention that Exxon just acknowledged that its pipeline spill into the Yellowstone River in Montana was 50% larger than first estimated. Do you have to be a radical environmentalist to question Transcanada building a pipeline over an aquifer that supplies 80% of state’s water for drinking and irrigation?

The other unsung issue is eminent domain. There a foreign company attempting to use eminent domain to take private land from Americans. In 2005, in a controversial 5-4 decision the US Supreme Court decision ruled that eminent domain can be used to transfer ownership from one private party to another. Public outrage was acute and over 40 states strengthen the eminent domain protections for citizens. Federal legislation was introduced to the same extent but never passed. All of the judges in the dissent on the case were the most conservative justices appointed by Republicans, but now we have Republican congressman clamoring for the use of eminent domain in the Keystone XL situation.